Inclusive ENDA Facebook organization
It has networking tools/help in contacting your representative and other stuff. The news page reads:
***If you would like to help in the education campaign, here is what we are asking you to do***
1. Sign up at http://bit.ly/10Ot47 to meet with your legislator in your district in August. You will need your Representative’s name, which you can find at http://votesmart.org.
2. Call your Senators and Representative to request their support of an inclusive ENDA that protects sexual orientation and gender identity from job discrimination. Contact your legislators by calling the U.S. Capitol at 202-224-3121. If you don’t know your legislators by name, give your zip code, and you will be connected. You can also find out at http://votesmart.org
3. Contact other unconfirmed Senators and Representatives by email, telephone or fax. Contact links for the Senate: http://bit.ly/45WGMc and for the House at http://bit.ly/NUFUd.
4. Post the results of your contacts on the Wall below (even if it’s just that you left a message). (Please use the Wall for information about your legislators only, and post other statements in the discussion section.)
5. Follow the discussion on Twitter by searching #enda
Recent Blog Posts
Why You Should Sign Up To Meet With Your Legislator Now http://bit.ly/sojtr
Click Here To Email 50 ENDA-Shy House Dems Now http://bit.ly/1anPiE
The 9 Unconfirmed ENDA House Votes in Pennsylvania http://bit.ly/398dnm
Click Here To Email 20 House Republicans Open to ENDA http://bit.ly/17cM8U
Click Here To Meet With Your US Legislators in August. Or Bye-Bye ENDA http://bit.ly/1a6YuB
Anyway, I know who the officers are, and I know people have hard feelings toward a couple of them (at least), due to recent and not-so-recent events. But this isn’t about them, it’s about ENDA.
Regarding the Raychel “Roo” story
It’s been pointed out to me that I neglected to apologize for passing the story along without checking all possible sources first.
I’m leaving the original post up because it has discussion critiquing the validity of the story, and I did have my own suspicions about whether it was true (and alluded to that in the original post), but I didn’t make them clear enough, and helped spread a hoax pseudicide that had already hurt multiple people on a trans-oriented forum.
Queen Emily Guest Blogging at Feministe
I forgot to point to this.
You can see her posts here.
Enjoy the brilliant posts that she hasn’t cross-posted back here! Boggle at the horrible comments on her introduction post.
Via Monica Roberts: Another Historic Meeting, Another Melanin-free Transgender Contingent
I don’t have much to add to this – Monica lays it down:
I
went nuclear last year when there was a historic committee hearing on transgender issues and not one African-American transgender person was invited to participate.
There was another historic gathering of importance to GLBT people that took place on Monday. It was in the wake of the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots that took place June 28, 1969.
This time the host was none other than the POTUS, and it took place in the building at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that my ancestors helped construct with their unpaid labor.
So did the white transgender community learn its lesson from last year and make sure in the twelve transgender people that were selected to be there, there was some African-American representation?
Nope.
As usual, the white transgender community was well represented on the transman and transwoman side, and Latino Diego Sanchez was there in his new role as Rep. Barney Frank’s chief legislative aide. The NCTE folks were present and we even had one former NTACer in Kathy Padilla there.
You can read the rest at Bilerico or Transgriot.
Update via Bil Browning, which does not make things better:
Monica,
I thought this was a fabulous post pointing out a very important problem. I thought it was so good I did some background checking for you.
It seems that Miss Major (and several other Stonewall veterans – I don’t know their skin color or trans/cis status) were on the guest list but didn’t make it through the Secret Service background check. A few other African-American trans folk were also vetted but didn’t make the cut either. I’m not sure if you were on the list or not.
The reason given by the Secret Service was that the denied potential guests had police records beyond simply activist demonstrations and the like. As you’ve talked about in previous posts, African-American transwomen are more likely to be bound up in the sex for money trade and have a high incidence of prostitution and drug-related charges. (To be clear – I’m not placing a value judgement on that; I’m just trying to provide background.)
Apparently the first few Stonewall veterans – including everyone – were denied access because of their legal charges. They were scrambling a few days before the event to find someone – anyone! – that was at Stonewall that could attend. Eventually they found a couple men who could pass the Secret Service background check.
In spite of the history of the event – I think you’re on point. Just like they found some Stonewall veterans who could pass muster, surely they could have found some African-American transpeople – whether trans men or women – who could pass a simple background check. It’s not as if all African-American transfolk have been in trouble with the law. If they could spend so much time tracking down Stonewall vets to attend, they could have spent more time looking for African-American transfolk. Period.
I want to go on several rants here (stereotypes of trans women of color primarily being in sex work, racial profiling and how it’s used against black people, how criminal records are used to shut some people out of the political process). This explanation feels rather thin, although I’m sure people will defend it as “The way things are” and “you can’t let criminals near the president,” no matter what anyone might have done to get those criminal records, or how it compares to the way white people are not inordinately targeted by law enforcement or experience the same degree of convictions and sentencing. Racism surely played a role in how the guest list was selected – entrenched, systemic, institutional racism that does not begin and end with that guest list, but whoever was responsible for the guest list was certainly complicit in maintaining that racism.
A Point About Cis:
Cis is not targeted at gay white men, nor is it targeted at feminist women, nor is it targeted at any one particular demographic. Cis people are everywhere. At the most liberal interpretation (highest number of trans people, plus genderqueer and intersex people) I’m aware of, cis people make up ~480-495 out of every 500 people on Earth.
Cis is not an insult, it’s not a slur. It is, however, as much of an identity as trans is, even if most cis people never stop to think about the fact that they’re cis, that they just assume that being what they are (”I’m just a person, I’m not cis/white/het/able-bodied!”) is the normal way to be.
Being cis doesn’t make anyone a bad person. Having privilege doesn’t make anyone a bad person. When you sit back and you think “that person who’s calling me cis is saying I have privilege and thus I AM A TERRIBLE PERSON” consider that the trans person who says that may be white, heterosexual, middle-class, able-bodied, or otherwise privileged. That trans person who says that may even have come to terms with hir own privileges, and does not take it personally when her privilege is pointed out to her.
And what does this privilege really mean? It means several things. Having privilege means is that it’s something you don’t have to think about. As far as you’re concerned, culture is designed to accommodate you in this particular way, treat you as if you’re normal, the human default with regards to gender identity (if you’re a male and identify yourself as a man, or you’re a female and identify yourself as a woman). You don’t have to think about your gender identity because everyone considers it natural. People may consider how you do gender to be wrong, but they don’t question whether you are a man or a woman. They may think that a man attracted to men or a woman attracted to women is doing gender wrong because you’re not heterosexual, but that is homophobia, and is not the same thing that trans people experience. I say this as a trans woman who is also a lesbian.
Transphobia is when I’m told that I’m not really a woman at all, that I’m supposed to be a man. Transphobia is when someone decides I must really be a gay man because I transitioned, despite the fact that I’m attracted to women. Many many many cis gay men and lesbian women make this mistake – I really love it when a cis gay man starts loudly complaining about how trans people are just giving into heteronormativity by transitioning, as if all trans women are really cis gay men who want to naturalize their attraction to men as heterosexual, or all trans men are really cis lesbian women who want to naturalize their attraction to women as heterosexual. And at least acknowledge any genderqueer people, who may identify as both man and woman, or neither, or as in-between, or whose identification may shift. And acknowledge trans people who don’t transition and express their gender in other ways.
Transphobia was when I had an ID card that claimed I was male, even while living as a woman, because surgery is required to change your documentation in many states. Transphobia is when I had to out myself every time I applied for a job, purchased alcohol, or entered a night club. Transphobia is when I go to the emergency room, and once it comes out that I’m trans, regardless of the state I’m in, the conversation is not about why I’m in the ER, but what my genitalia looks like.
Being cis means not dealing with those things on a systematic basis. You may deal with similar things, and you may occasionally deal with some of those things. I know more than a few butch lesbian women who have been asked to leave or even forced out of women’s restrooms, but at the same time, I don’t know any who were asked – as I was – to use a restroom two blocks away when I was attending a business school because they felt I was too dangerous to allow in a restroom with cis women.
And when someone (cis or trans) talks about bigoted cis people, just because you’re cis, does not mean that it’s about you. Not all cis people wallow in anti-trans bigotry to the degree that John Aravosis does. Just because society is built to accommodate you and exclude me in one particular does not mean that every reference I make to the group you belong to is actually specifically about you. If you don’t think it’s about you, and you’re not being called out, don’t take it personally.
This is what’s wrong with the conversation that went down on Pam’s House Blend, and is still going down there now – that so many people are making the fact that transphobic cis people exist into an attack upon them. And by doing so, they end up saying and doing things that fulfills the label they’re trying to reject – the cis person who says bigoted things about trans people. Congratulations. Now, do the easy thing, and stop making it about you. Stop taking rightful criticisms directed at John Aravosis personally. You didn’t make him say those things, and if you don’t agree with them, why are you getting defensive when someone refers to John and his supports as transphobic cis men?
Why does this even need to be explained?
I almost forgot to add – read this post about the need for cis terminology.
Lateisha Green: hate crime trial starts on Monday, July 13
Monday (July 13) sees the start of the trial of Dwight R. DeLee, who is charged with second-degree murder in connection with the shooting last November 14, 2008, of Latiesha “Teish” Green.
Ms Green and her brother, Mark Cannon, were shot with a rifle as they sat in a parked car. The bullet grazed the left arm of Mark Cannon, who was in the driver’s seat, and hit Ms Green in the chest.
From the start, Ms Green’s family pressed for her death to be treated as a hate crime, and the court case – which will be held in Syracuse, NY – will be tried as such, although the prosecution contends the victim was targeted because of sexual orientation. Ms Green’s sister, Shaconia Williams, said Ms Green called herself a transsexual woman.
Speaking in Cnylink Local News (link here), Roxanne Green, Teish’s mother, acknowledged that the spotlight has been hard for her at times.
“It’s bad enough to live with families that don’t approve,” said Roxanne Green. “I never expected a gay son and I have two. It needs to stop. They hurt and I hurt. I have a boy living with me now because he can’t go home. For these kids to fear school! Teish had to go to school late and leave school early. That was the school’s idea of helping! It made Teish angry. She wanted to go when everyone else did.”
[...]
“I relive a lot of things,” she said. “[She] really took something precious. I lost a mother when I was nine and that hurt. Losing a child is a whole different hurt.”
But Mary Alice Smothers [of the Wyoming St. P.E.A.C.E. office] doesn’t see this as different from other fights over the years.
“It’s always about the youth,” she said. “It’s always about empowering them to be able to speak and have their voice. We let adultism get in the way. They know where they want to go. As parents, we know we raised them on the right track and we have to let them.”
Gina Morvay has created a Facebook page to act as both a memorial for Ms Green and a clearing house for information about the trial. Here’s the link.
—————
Cross-posted at Bird of Paradox
Transprose: An Open Letter
Posted here, reposted on QT with permission:
Dear Cissexual Queer/Gender Theorists, Feminists, and Trans Allies:
We need to talk. That’s not quite accurate, actually. I need to talk, and you need to shut up and listen for a minute. Because some of y’all have been talking about me, and you’ve been talking so loudly that you haven’t been hearing what I’m saying. Some of you haven’t even noticed that I’m in the room.
You probably don’t know me. But a few of you seem to think you know everything you need to know. Enough to fill up chapters in academic texts or pages on your blogs. Enough to make fetishistic jokes or webcomics. Enough to name my genitals for me.
To be fair, y’all probably didn’t even realize you were talking about me specifically, most of the time. Thanks to testosterone and chest reconstruction surgery, you couldn’t pick me out of a crowd. But, make no mistake—you’re talking about my identity and my experience, too. And I’m tired of being made to feel invisible, or like I shouldn’t speak up about this stuff. So I’m going to offer a few suggestions, and give you yet another chance to respect my identity, and the identities of other people that you’ve been (unintentionally, I’m sure) stomping all over.
Now take a seat, because this might take a few single-spaced pages. Maybe take a few notes this time, since you obviously forgot about the last thirty times we’ve had discussions like this.
First, in order to respect me, you need to work on completely deconstructing the conflation of masculinity and maleness. A lot of y’all have done some great and much-needed work around dismantling the bullshit idea that masculinity is the sole property of male people. But almost in the same breath, some of you seem to forget that there is nothing inherently masculine about maleness.
I’m male, but I’m not masculine-identified. At all. I don’t care how I look to you. I don’t care if you know that I’m trans. I don’t even care if you know that I identified as an andro dyke for a minute. I’m still not masculine. My experience is not a masculine experience. Period. If, for any reason(s) you think that I am, or if you don’t find it to be a big deal when my femme identity is invalidated, or if you know that I’m feminine, but—goshdarnit—you just keep forgetting? Then you need to check your shit.
Part of respecting me has to include calling bullshit on things that imply, whether directly or indirectly, that male people have inherent masculinity. At the very least, it requires that you notice when it happens. In case you’re confused, here are a couple of examples.
What about when people point out to y’all that it’s problematic to use the word “trans-masculine” to mean all female-assigned people who are masculine-identified, genderqueer-identified, and male-identified, and to exclude all male-assigned people—even masculine- or genderqueer- identified trans female people? I know, I know—“It’s impossible to find a word that will please everybody!” We’ve all heard that one before, right? Be quiet, you’re being divisive. Not to harsh your mellow, but I don’t want to be silenced any more than you do, especially when I can think of several alternatives to “trans-masculine” off the top of my head.
And, I know that lots of female-assigned-at-birth (FAAB) trans people use “transmasculine”. The trans community is only in the beginning stages of trying on new, accurate, and empowering language. We’re going to evolve, and you’re going to have to keep up, and listen to the discussions we’re having. But, while we’re working on that, how about you stop saying “transmasculine”, if what you’re really trying to do is build a community around what you assume is in the pants of “transmasculine” people (or rather, what you assume isn’t in their pants). And that is what you’re doing, 95% of the time.
It’s important to a lot of folks (for various reasons of variable worth) to have an umbrella term to unite butches to genderqueers to trans guys and everything “in between”. But to say that “trans-masculinity” necessarily encompasses trans maleness is to shoot your trans-feminism in the foot. Not all cis men are masculine. Many trans women are masculine, and there are many MAAB genderqueer folks who would fit comfortably under the “transmasculine” umbrella. And trans genders are as complex as, and deserve as much respect as, cis genders.
Of course y’all all know that in theory, but I need to see some action.
And when I say “action”, I definitely don’t mean like when “Top Hot Butches” showed up, and it included a metric shit ton of people who were assumed to be masculine, just because they’re male-identified? Oh, and one Riki Wilchins. I’m not sure what Riki Wilchins’ identity is currently, but how—when doing a project about “rejecting compulsory femininity”—is Wilchins the only MAAB person on that list?
Seriously, why there weren’t way more masculine-identified and genderqueer-identified trans female people on that list? If anybody’s strength and beauty should be celebrated for “reject[ing] compulsory femininity”, in my opinion, it’s them. How many masculine cis female people do you know who have had their femaleness challenged in a meaningful way because they choose to exhibit “intentional masculinity” (and, no, being called “sir” in the checkout line does not count)?I mean, if the primary criterion for “butchness” is “reject[ing] compulsory femininity”, I’m not sure why male people should even be on a list like that, since there’s nothing “compulsory” about male femininity. Even if the male person is trans. And there’s nothing necessarily “intentional” about trans male masculinity. I’m not even really sure what “intentional” means in that context, actually. How is FAAB masculinity more of a performance than any other gender expression (which can either be “not a performance at all” or “completely a performance”, depending on your views). If it’s not, then why is it mentioned?
The original “Top Hot Butches” appeared to be a celebration of what its author perceived as “butchness”. And—to me at least—it was damn clear that the author’s idea of “butchness” is about female masculinity—specifically, about FAAB masculinity. I hope I don’t even have to go into how fucked up it is to practically go out of your way to praise the masculinity of [trans] male people, while overwhelmingly ignoring the masculinity of [trans] female people.And, you know what’s not a good excuse? This:
I would love suggestions for more butch transwomen to include; I’ve been asking, and looking around, and I did include #84 Riki Wilchins, but surely there must be more than just her. I’m just not familiar with them. It’s so hard to include people you don’t know about, you know? Impossible, in fact. And who I know is completely related to my own standpoint. It’s a huge challenge to get a range of diversity on a list like this.
I find it hard to believe that they were personally familiar with all the FAAB folks they listed. And, even if they were, I think it says volumes about whose and what genders they perceive as “butch”, if they have just happened to never have stumbled upon the writings, activism, contributions, and hotness of masculine-identified MAAB trans people.
It’s a side step, and it avoids something that many folks in the “trans inclusive” queer women’s community need to own up to. If you don’t make space for MAAB trans people in your community, and none show up, whose fault is that? And whose responsibility is it to fix it?
But I don’t even believe for a second that “Top Hot Butches” was really about masculinity, anyway. Because no cis guy (feminine or masculine) would’ve been put on that list, but I have no doubt that—were I a semi-famous openly-trans guy—I’d have been considered for that list without a second thought. I think it’s a safe bet, since I’m pretty sure (at least) one of the guys included in the original list wouldn’t even identify his gender as masculine.
But trans genders are as worthy of respect as cis genders, right? Fortunately, I’m not naïve enough to have dared to hope that the Feministing community would back me up. Instead of calling out cissexism, y’all posted what seemed like a billion comments in which you didn’t notice that there was anything busted going on, or attempted to silence trans people who pointed it out, or—and this was my personal favorite—said shit to the effect of “I can see that this is problematic, but damn that list is hot”. Who doesn’t like their cissexism with a side of fetishism?
The link between masculinity and maleness may have been broken—but only for cis maleness and cis masculinity. I believe that a lot of y’all quietly believe that there is something intrinsically masculine about trans maleness—something that doesn’t exist in cis maleness. And, whatever that thing is, it apparently ties me to this idea of female[-assigned-at-birth] masculinity. And I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that it’s my hypothetical vagina.
That’s not respecting trans genders. That’s cissexism. And there’s no excuse for it. Not “we need more butch visibility”. Not “that’s not what they meant”. Not “[some] trans guys are a part of the community”. And definitely not “ think of it more as a celebration of bending gender norms, rather than a celebration of masculinity” (if you haven’t caught on, that’s fucked up, too). The fact that folks who consider themselves to be trans allies glossed over what amounts to blatant cissexist bullshit. . . it’s disgusting. Even more so because so many of y’all seemed to be overly willing to do so, simply because they liked the eye candy.
Why is it so important for y’all to claim a connection between “butchness”/female masculinity and trans maleness? Sure, connections often exist. But you never seem to be talking about individual people’s experiences, and their unique relationships to their genders. That is something to celebrate and honor within your community. Instead, you’re conscripting all trans male people into your ideas of “butchness”, “trans-masculinity”, and “female masculinity”, without even considering the identities of those of us who are not masculine.Just because you don’t see us, it doesn’t mean we’re not there. And it definitely doesn’t mean you can generalize the [valid] experiences and identities of the trans guys you know onto the trans guys you don’t.
And, yes, after the outrage, the trans men were removed from the list. Last I heard, they were being asked individually whether they’d like to be included. The non-consensual gendering was an important issue that was appropriately addressed. But the whole thing still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Just because many of the trans guys listed happen to be okay with being included doesn’t change the facts of why they were included to begin with. Instead of being carefully chosen in a way that showed respect for their unique identities, they were chosen simply because they’re trans. They would’ve been chosen even if they wouldn’t have wanted to be.
Perhaps all’s well that ends well? But if you make a fucked up assumption about a group that I’m a member of, even if that assumption happens to be true for me? I’m still going to think you’re an asshole.
This might also be a good time to mention that I’m genderqueer-identified. Does that surprise you? It seems like it should, considering that FAAB trans people who object to this shit are often portrayed as binary-identified, male-identified, cisgender, not-radical, and “stealth” men of transsexual history. Many of whom don’t even consider themselves trans, much less queer.But, no. I’m genderqueer. I’m genderqueer, and I’m telling you there’s a fucking problem. And one of these problems is subversivism. This shit is said with an eye roll. It’s a way of recognizing, but essentially dismissing concerns. Because all those things—male identities, nondisclosure, cisgender/binary identites—are automatically assumed to be backwards. Or, if not backwards, at least less evolved.
Lots of y’all seem to imagine that cisgender transsexual men are all so wracked with body dysphoria and internalized transphobia that they couldn’t possibly understand or respect other trans guys’ non-binary identities. Of course those guys have a problem with “transmasculine”, or that stupid list, or the creepy bullshit Margaret Cho has been spewing, etc. Most of the time, even when you admit that what you said/did/wrote was fucked up, it seems insincere. As if dissenters should be humored and shushed, so that everybody can go back to universalizing the experience of some trans people at the expense of others.
I’m not saying that cisgender trans men are all innocent victims; cisgenderism is a prevalent and serious problem among binary-identified folks (cis and trans). But there’s a difference between cisgenderism and people being pissed that you consider respecting their identities less important than drawing the lines of community where you want them, no matter who it hurts.
Since I’ve got your attention, we also need to talk a bit about the way some of y’all have been treating the complexity of genderqueer identities. Since it’s still so fresh in everybody’s minds, let’s take the “Top Hot Butches” list, for example. Some genderqueer people have butch or masculine identities. But many genderqueer people—even FAAB genderqueer people (me, for example)—wouldn’t identify their genders as “masculine” at all.
I highly doubt that the author of the list took the time to check to make sure that the genderqueer-identified folks on they included actually identified as butch/masculine. What seems to have happened is that they looked at the confetti of identities that make up genderqueerness, and decided, “Okay, so I know that some of y’all identify outside the binary and all that, but in reality you’re presenting as masculine (or male, which is really just hyper-extended masculinity), so we’ll just say that you ‘present in a way that rejects compulsory femininity, and display some sort of intentional masculinity.’ For short, we’ll call that butch.”
Maybe it goes without saying that, when y’all say “genderqueer”, it’s usually pretty safe to assume that you mean FAAB genderqueers. You mean those genderqueers you pretend to humor, but quietly consider women/female (despite the fact that many explicitly reject those labels). I’ll start believing that y’all respect my genderqueer identity once you start respecting (or even acknowledging) the genderqueer identities of MAAB genderqueer people.
This shit? It’s Not Okay. What you’re doing here—it’s Not Okay. And you’re doing it over, and over, and over again. And it’s exactly why I find so much of gender and queer theory to be a bunch of appropriative bullshit. My identities, my experiences, and my life is not an illustration in some cissexual exploration of “radical” gender and sex. Y’all need to work your transmisogynistic, biological-deterministic shit out, and then we can talk about the social and political implications of my transition. Maybe.
With hope, but no love,
Caleb
clarification
About the email exchange I posted. You’ll notice I apologized to NOWHC for posting my initial post. This is not an apology to the general blogosphere, because I’ve already apologized to the people whose work I have affected. Still, I need to make something clear.
I fucked up.
I shouldn’t have posted up on here before NOWHC responded to me directly. But I was just so angry, about this being round eleventy billion of transphobia for me in health care, and scared, because I don’t know what to do here. I’m terrified of getting sick, cos I know from experience that I have a slim chance of getting treated properly by anyone who’s not my regular doctor.
So I lashed out, didn’t give them time to respond, time to let me know what was going on. In my white privilege, I thought my anger was justified, that my need was the only important thing.
The problem is not primarily that this one health clinic, built for populations that desperately need it, excluded us trans women but that practically every other health care facility does it too, not necessarily in terms of policy (most people don’t think enough about us to put one in) but certainly in terms of practice. It’s easy to look at one particular place, which seems so tantalizing close to being what you need, and not at the whole, fucked-up picture.
I do not take responsibility for the actions of others, but I regret beyond words my role as catalyst in starting this.
Queen Emily
The response from NOWHC
New Orleans Women’s Health Clinic has allowed me to post their response to my query about health care and their policy of excluding trans women. It’s pretty depressing reading all round – they’re not able to sustain care because of the difficult of finding non prejudiced doctors here, not only with trans women but women of color, women with disabilities, and GLBTI etc. This raises serious questions with me about the possibility of finding more than the odd good doctor on trans health care anywhere.
They’re currently evaluating the possibility of providing any health care at all. I have offered to work with them to educate any doctors on trans women specific care, and to work on fundraising to help achieve that, however we’ll have to see if that pans out.
ETA: NOWHC have requested I post the entire exchange, in the name of transparency. Because of privacy concerns, I have removed my email address from the exchange.
The email exchange in full:
Queen Emily —-
Hi y’all.
I’m a young trans woman moving to the area and I’m looking for good, safe health care (something that is almost an impossibility in many areas). Your website says you do not provide services for (”male” assigned) transgendered women. I’m wondering:
1. Is this still the case? (sometimes people can be slow on the website updating)
2. If so, why is this the case? I don’t understand how providing hormones (or the contraceptive pill to post GRS women) is any different from caring for menopausal cis women. This seems especially arbitrary given that you state you care for female assigned people with DSD who may have had similar operations.
and 3. If so, do you have any referrals for trans women friendly clinics?
Regards,
Emily.
NOWHC —-
Emily,
Thanks for emailing us your request. We apologize for the delay in getting back to you. We receive hundreds of emails a week about services, volunteer and internship opportunities, and tons of junk mail unfortunately. As a result, and due to our capacity, we have about a week-turn-around rate with email responses.
Currently, we are not providing medical services, as these services have been suspended since late last Fall. We are in transition as we seek a new Medical Director, while continuing all of our other programs. Unfortunately, we have not had an opportunity to update our website detailing all of our programs and our current list of services.
As you have accurately noted, few health care resources exist for trans women in general, and this is particularly true in New Orleans, despite the fact that New Orleans had the largest Black queer population in the country pre-Katrina, with trans women of color, almost exclusively working class and low-income New Orleans natives, struggling to get decent affordable health care in the city for decades. The destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina took a terrible toll on our health care system and it has been very difficult for us to not be in a position to provide trans affirming medical services to women in our community who need them, despite our local efforts.
The following resources may be of some help to you as relocate to the area:
The Drop-in-Center Clinic ? located at 428 N. Rampart Street. The Drop-in-Center provides trans-affirming care. The Center provides medical and social services to youth between the ages of 13 and 24 years-old. Services at the Center are geared toward homeless, at-risk, and queer youth. They can be reached at 504-897-948-6701.
Planned Parenthood of Louisiana ? located at 4018 Magazine Street. Their number is 504-897-9200.
You may also consider contacting the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center of New Orleans, which is located at 212 Decatur Street in the French Quarter. The Center?s number is 504-945-1103. The St. Thomas Community Health Clinic is also a local resource to contact. St. Thomas is located Uptown in the Lower Garden District at 1020 St. Andrew Street, and they can be reached at 504-529-5558.
We agree that the questions and concerns you raise are very important. The priorities we hold in providing safe, accessible, and unbiased care to women regardless of their race, income, sexuality, gender identity, body type, citizenship status, work sector, legal history, ability, age, language, and family size and status are often regarded as a “risk” and “liability” by many medical professionals. This reality has delayed our efforts to hire a new Medical Director and created many barriers for many members of our community, including you, in seeking safe, quality, and respectful services.
In making the statements “we are currently not able to provide care to trans people who were male assigned at birth or who have had genital sex reassignment surgery. Please call for referrals,” we were referencing the lack of experience and training that our former medical staff had in providing trans affirmative care to all women regardless of their body types, and gender identities and expressions. We recognize that the current language on our website marginalizes trans women in particular, even though it says elsewhere that we provide services to “all women.” Although “services” provided at the Clinic are not restricted to our medical programs, we recognize that the way it is written implies that we offer no services at all to trans women, which is marginalizing and confusing. It would be more accurate to say that our goal is to provide medical services to all women, though we are having a difficult time reaching it. We take responsibility for this inaccurate representation, and for the ways in which the language is disrespectful, and we sincerely apologize.
Collectively and organizationally, we are committed to creating institutions and environments that challenge gender-policing and trans and homophobia by dismantling racist, heterosexist, patriarchal, classist, and xenophobic ideologies of exclusion, discrimination, hatred, and violence, which creates barriers for many members of our community, particularly those persons who are women of color, poor, LGBTQ, immigrant, differently-abled, homeless, heads of households, disabled, sex workers, incarcerated and formerly incarcerated, young, and living in racially and economically segregated communities. Our website doesn’t reflect this politic effectively and we are currently in the process of modifying it.
Besides language, we share the concern about the core issue of offering safe, quality, and respectful services to all women. Since our founding, we have struggled to hire medical staff who don?t pathologize, demonize, and criminalize the bodies of undocumented women, women with disabilities, l/b/t/q/i women, women of color, low-income women, homeless women, and women working in the sex industry because of our sexuality, reproductive decisions, and gender expressions. Currently, we are evaluating if we can realistically find medical staff that meet this expectation, particularly given the current conditions of the city.
We hope the resources we have shared are helpful. If not, please contact us at 504-524-8255 or via email again and we will work with you and do our best to find the resources that you need.
New Orleans Women’s Health Clinic
1406 Esplanade Ave.
New Orleans, LA 70116
504-524-8255 (Office)
504-524-8285 (Fax)
www.nowhc.org
Queen Emily —
Hi, thanks for that. That’ll be very helpful.
I’m sorry to hear about the lack of medical services. I may have inadvertedly started a blog firestorm when I posted a rant on my blog (questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com) about it. I’m sorry about that, I should have waited for a response. Do you think I could let people online know about the situation? I don’t want to break confidentiality, but obviously there’s a lot of people online interested, and a good many trans women and/or women of color feeling hurt and angry about the policy.
About the situation, is there anything I can do to help? If medical services are to return (which I really hope that they do), I’d be happy to lend my time to educating medical personnel on trans women specific needs.
The second is, if there’s a need for more funds to pay doctors and nurses, I’d be happy to use my contacts in the trans and radical women of color blogospheres and organise through social media to conduct a fund-raising drive directing people to your website to donate. I’ve seen people raise thousands of dollars with just a little Paypal button, so that’s one option.
Regards,
Emily.
Queen Emily —
Oh, just to clarify, the fundraising drive offer is conditional on trans women inclusion if/when the medical services become available. No trans woman is likely to get behind that, otherwise.
NOWHC —
Emily,
Thank you for reaching out. There is a lot going on right now as we determine whether or not we can sustain the kind of clinic we want, so we will have to follow up with you about your offer of support in the future. In the meantime, it would be alright with us if you posted this entire e-mail exchange on your blog.
Queen Emily —
Ok. I hope you can work out something sustainable, and once again do keep me in mind for later.
Regards,
Emily.
NOWHC —
Emily,
Thank you for posting our email response to you on your blog. We also appreciate your apology and taking responsibility for not allowing us the opportunity to follow up with you before you posted your original blog post. Because of the nature of this matter and all of the blog posts that have circulated, we feel that it is important to communicate not just our response, but the entire email exchange as we confirmed below. We want to have an open process about this and we think it’s important to be transparent about all of the communication between us.
Queen Emily —
Oh ok, no problems. I’ll post the rest up now.
Cis is hostile terminology? Really?
A regular (a cis gay man) at Pam’s House Blend expresses that he feels “cis” is offensive and demeaning, and that trans people who use it are basically bad people (plus we’re bad people if we’re unhappy with John Aravosis’ transphobic remarks):
For the record, I find cis- to be offensive. In general, I thought our community (I mean the whole LGBT rainbow here) uses terms that are acceptable to those being described. That is, we use the preferred gender of trans people, we call someone bi if they identify as bi, we don’t say tranny, etc.So why is it okay for (some of) the trans community to call us cis-? If members of the trans community said “stop calling us trans, we find it offensive” would we here at PHB continue to say “trans”? I doubt it very much.
Cis is a neutral term applied to people who aren’t trans. It’s intended to decenter the notion that not being trans is the natural, default state for human beings and that being trans is a deviation, and that trans people are other. Most terminology that cis people use to define themselves as cis generally reifies cissexism and cissupremacy.
As much as I disagree with Autumn’s fairly rapid agreement with this statement, despite the reams of material written about what cis actually means, her invocation of the tone argument, and her comparing the use of “cis” to violence and hate:
To begin with, I’m giving up on the words cissexual and cisgender. I saw these as neutral terms, and now I see these are not. Thank you for your reasoned explanation as to why.And yeah, civil tone matters, and thinking in terms of broad communities matter. I see these as being more and more as important as time goes on.
One more MLK Jr. quote:
Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars… Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.
I, for one, want to see the stars through my very real rose-colored glasses — $50, pink-shaded, prescription glasses I actually bought from Zenni Optical to make that personal point about looking for a brighter, more beautiful world.
I am perhaps more concerned by the threat to ban anyone who defends “cis” terminology from commenting at Pam’s House Blend:
This is going nowhere, and is starting to offend people at The Blend.And in a post that’s theme is about behaving civility, I’m not having any of it.
Public warning in this thread — next person who uses this thread to make comment defending “cis” terminology gets a trap door drop.
Message received, Autumn. It is vitally important to protect the cis commenters at PHB from those dangerous trans people who dare to label privilege.
Edit: Just to be clear, it’s not that Autumn disagrees with “cis” terminology. It’s the tone argument (used at least twice), and the threat to ban anyone who defends “cis” usage.
Edit edit: Comments back on
